HF 

o 

2651 

3 

S8B85 

* 

X 

n> 

3 

1 

^c, 


?» 

0> 

OI 

■**• 

sD 

CO 

us 

CO 

a 

tp 

o 

Q> 

■^ 

Ul 

/ 1 


N.  Y.  State  Lftraty 


CONDENSED  SUMMARY 


EXISTING  CONDITION 


Sugar  Tariff  Question, 


AND    THK 


1QUITY  OF  AN  AD  VALOREM  SUGAR  TARIFF,  OR  THE 
PRESENT  TARIFF  WITH  POLARISCOPE  TESTS  | 

PRACTICALLY  ESTABLISHED. 


By  HENRY  A.  BBOW^^^^WOQSg;^ 

DUPLICATE 

Ex    Special    Treasury    Agent,    tJ>*J^/  J^^ 


WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 

PRINTED  BY  JUDD  &  DETWEILEE. 

1881. 


CONDENSED  SUMMARY 

0¥    THE 

EXISTING  CONDITION 

OF    THE 

Sugar  Tariff  Question, 

AND   THE 

EQUITY  OF  AN  AD  VALOREM  SUGAR  TARIFF,  OR  THE 
PRESENT  TARIFF  WITH  POLARISCOPE  T.ESTS 

PRACTICALLY  ESTABLISHED. 


By  HENRY  A.  BROWN, 

Saxonville,  Mass., 

Ex    Special    Treasury    Agent,    IT.    S. 


WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 

PRINTED  BY  JUDD  &  DETWEILEE. 

1881. 


'    - 


MAIN   LIBRAttr  AGRIC.  OfPT. 


CONTENTS. 


SECTION  FIRST. 

Opening  Statements  on  the  Sugar  Question.  Statistics  of  Production,  Consumption, 
Beet,  Cane,  Sorghum  Sugars,  $c;  Cause  of  Revenue  Abuses;  Sugar  Refining; 
Home  Production,  §c. 

SECTION  SECOND. 

Sugar  Imports  from  and  trade  with  producing  Countries ;  Statistical  data  and  relevant 
deductions ;    American  Commerce,  Industries,  Src. 

SECTION  THIRD. 

Classification  of  Sugars  for  Duty  under  the  Dutch  Standard,  for  the  fiscal  gears  priding 
June  30,  1873,  1876,  1877,  187S,  1879,  1880,  vith  \eleo\.nt  Deductions,  Comparisons, 
and  Explanations. 

SECTION  FOURTH. 

Hawaiian  or  Sandwich  Island  Sugars  Duty  Free ;  Curious  results  of  Reciprocity  ; 
Statistics,  $c. 

SECTION  FIFTH. 

Practicability  of  an  Ad  valoretn  Sugar  Tariff  Proven.  Eleven  years'  Sugar  Statistics 
further  evidence  its  Equity.  Foreign  and  Home  Market  Value  for  Levying  Duty  ; 
The  present  Tariff  with  Polariscope  Tests;    Summary,  <j-c. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  tin-  vmr  188H,  by  IIkmiv  A.  Bkown,  o(  Saxonville,  Mass.,  In 
tlie  oilico  oi'iho  Librarian  of  Congress,  Washington,  D.  c. 


SECTION  FIRST. 

Opening  statements  on  the  sugar  question — Statistics  of  production,  con- 
sumption and  industries. 

Further  analysis  and  investigations,  current  official  data,  and 
information  gathered  by  me  since  the  issue  of  my  "  Revised  Analyses 
of  the  Sugar  Question  "  in  1879,  and  my  "  Statements  before  the 
Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,"  in  January,  1880,  require  concise 
statement  in  aid  of  legitimate  legislative  efforts  to  settle  the  sugar 
tariff  question  on  an  equitable  basis  that  will  not  only  furnish  rev- 
enue, but  permanently  protect  and  promote  the  interests  of  Amer- 
ican consumers,  home  productive  industries,  and  direct  commerce 
with  all  sugar-producing  countries ;  a  condensed  summary  of  new 
and  important  facts  relevant  to  the  importance,  growth  and  present 
magnitude  of  the  world's  sugar  producing  industries  is  therefore 
appropriate  and  necessary  in  this  opening. 

The  production  of  cane  sugar  throughout  the  world  for  the  crop 
year  ending  in  1880  will  certainly  exceed  4,000,000  tons,  or  8,960,- 
000,000  fibs,  of  cane  sugar  produced,  approximately,  as  follows, 
according  to  the  most  reliable  statistics  and  reports : 

Tons.  Tons. 

British   India 1,550,000  Louisiana 125,000 

Cuba,  Porto  Rico 700,000  Mauritius 125,000 

Other  Spanish  possessions 50,000  Philipine  Islands 120,000 

Br.  W.  I,  Demerara,  &c 250,000  Egypt,  &c 76,000 

China,  Hong  Kong,  &c 250,0(10  P^ru,  S.  A.,  &c 55.000 

Dutch  Ind.,  Java,  &c 220.000  Mexico 35,000 

French  W.  I.,  Guiana.. 175,000  Other  countries 140,000 

Brazil,  S.  A.,  &c 130,000  Total  cane  sugars 4,000,000 

In  addition  to  cane  sugar,  it  is  estimated  that  the  production  of 
maple,  palm  and  sorgum  sugars  in  the  crop  year  ending  in  1880, 
will  exceed  150,000  tons,  and  the  amount  of  beet-root  sugar  pro- 

M1655S5 


duced  in  Europe  the  present  crop  year  is  estimated  at  1,670,000 
tons,  apportioned  as  follows  : 

Tons.  Tons. 

Germany 500,000         Russia,  Poland 225,000 

France 425,000         Belgium,  Holland,  &c 110,(100 

Austria 410,000        Total  beet 1,670,000 

Total  known  production  of  sugars,  crop  year  ending  in  1880  : 

Tons.  Tons. 

Cane  sugar 4,000,000        Maple,   &c 150,000 

Beet,  Europe 1,670,000        Total  sugar 5,820,000 

There  are,  however,  good  reasons  for  believing  that  the  world's 
annual  production  of  cane  and  assimilative  sugars  exceeds  6,000,000 
(six  millions)  of  tons,  and  that  China,  from  whence  sugar  cane  first 
found  its  way  to  Europe,  alone  produces  enough  more  sugar  than 
she  reports,  to  more  than  justify  such  statement. 

Of  this  vast  quantity,  the  people  of  this  country  consumed,  in  the 
year  ending  in  1880,  nearly  1,000,000  tons;  say  one  sixth  part,  or 
as  officially  reported,  2,087,527,625  pounds  of  sugars,  as  follows: 

Pounds. 

Dutiable  sugars  entered  into  consumption 1,592,261,957 

Dutiable  Melado  entered  into  consumption 33,709,344 

Hawanan  sugars,  duty  free,  consumed 61,556,324 

Louisiana,  Texas,  &c,  250,000  hogsheads,  or  pounds    300,000,000 

Maple,  sorghum  and  beet  sugars 100,000.000 

Total  consumption  of  sugar  for  1880 2,087,527,625 

Total  annual  consumption  of  sugars,  per  capita,  in  the  United  States,  41.75  pounds. 

Great  Britain  consumes  per  capita  about  62  pounds  of  imported 
sugars  per  annum,  but  a  large  portion  thereof,  of  very  low  grade, 
is  fed  to  cattle  and  used  for  brewing  purposes.  Americans  are 
undoubtedly  the  largest  consumers  of  sugar  food  in  the  world,  as 
the  average  annual  consumption  per  capita  in  Europe,  including 
England,  is  less  than  20  pounds;  estimating  the  population  of  the 
world  at  1,500,000,000,  and  the  sugar  product  of  the  world  at 
6,000,000  tons,  or  13,440,000,000  pounds,  the  annual  consumption 
of  sugar  per  capita  throughout  the  world  is  less  than  9  pounds; 
clearly  evidencing  that  sugars  must  be  produced  in  vast  quantities 
not  reported,  or  that  the  common  people  among  the  older  nations 
of  the  earth  know  nothing  of  the  use  of  sugar  as  an  article  of  i'ood. 

Evident  progress  is  making  in  the  production  of  cane,  beel  and 
sorghum  sugars  in  this  country,  which,  however,  would  be  far  more 
rapid  it' our  importations  of  foreign  sugars  were  more  wholesomely 
confined  to  actual  raw  sugar  material,  paving  proper  ad  valorem 
duty,  with  which  we  can  compete,  instead  of  being  largely  com  posed 
of  foreign  semi-reliiied  sugars  called  centrifugals,  outwardly  dis- 
colored at  pleasure  by  the  producer  to  evade  duty,  with  which  we 
cannot  compete   until   centrifugals  are  properly   made   to  pay  an 


ad  valorem  duty,  which  is  the  true  and  only  equitable  solution  of 
the  sugar  tariff  question. 

Notwithstanding  these  formidable  obstacles  to  rapid  home  pro- 
duction, Louisiana  reports  evidence  that  her  product  in  the  crop 
year  1880-81  will  be  not  far  from  250,000  hogsheads,  about  300,- 
000,000  pounds  of  cane  sugar,  which  is  the  largest  quantity  pro- 
duced in  Louisiana  in  any  single  year  since  her  greatest  crop  year, 
1861-62,  when  she  produced  528,300,000  pounds  of  cane  sugars, 
which  she  can  readily  produce  annually  by  proper  cultivation  and 
the  equitable  protection  of  an  ad  valorem  sugar  tariff;  factors 
which  are  equally  essential  for  profitable  cane  sugar  production  in 
Texas;  there  are  good  reasons  to  believe  that  Louisiana  can  pro- 
duce double  her  present  crop  annually,  although  the  only  crop  years 
in  which  she  has  exceeded  her  present  crop  year  product  of  sugar 
are  as  follows : 

Pounds.  Pounds. 

Crop  year,  1852-53 368,100,000         Crop  year,  1857-58 307,700,000 

Crop  year,  1853-54 495,200,000        Crop  year,  1858-59 414,800,000 

Crop  year,   1854-55 385,700,030        Crop  year,  1861.62 528,300,000 

Beet-root  sugar  production  is  also  making  progress  in  this  coun- 
try, the  industry  has  been  fairly  established  with  encouraging  re- 
sults as  to  our  capacity  for  ^producing  sugar  beets  and  beet  sugar; 
there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  with  the  protection  afforded 
by  an  ad  valorem  tariff  on  foreign  sugars,  and  proper  encourage- 
ment of  the  industry  for  a  period  of  five  or  six  years,  this  country 
can  produce  at  least  half  the  quantity  of  sugar  required  for  home 
consumption  from  beets  alone;  the  net  sugar  product  from  sugar 
beets  is  found  to  be  substantially  the  same  in  Portland,  Maine,  and 
Alvarado,  California,  at  which  points  well  ordered  beet-sugar 
factories  are  in  full  operation,  while  several  other  beet-sugar  fac- 
tories, located  in  different  States,  have  begun,  or  are  about  to  begin, 
operations;  farmers  readily  obtain  from  ($5)  five  to  ($7)  seven  dol- 
lars per  ton,  according  to  time  and  point  of  delivery,  for  unwashed 
beet  roots,  and  retain  the  green  tops  for  feeding  to  cattle;  they  can 
also  buy  the  beet  pulp  residuum  from  the  factory  for  about  one  dollar 
per  ton,  and  use  it  to  advantage  and  profit  in  fattening  cattle. 

Maple  and  sorghum  sugars  are  produced  in  respectable  quanti- 
ties in  this  country.  The  cultivation  of  sorghum  for  the  production 
of  sugar  and  syrup  is  on  the  increase  in  several  Western  States. 
The  numerous  annual  experiments  made  at  the  Agricultural  De- 
partment in  Washington,  with  sorghum,  abundantly  prove  that 
sugar  and  syrup  can  be  profitably  made  from  sorghum  grown  in  this 
country,  under  the  same  condition  of  reasonable  protection  required 
for  the  profitable  production  of  Louisiana  cane,  and  beet  root  sugars 
as  named  above.  The  estimated  production  of  beet,  maple,  and 
sorghum  sugars  in  this  country  the  present  year  is  100,000,000  lbs.; 
more  than  one-half  being  maple  sugar. 


6 

Sugar  refining,  which  in  this  country  especially  has  become  a  pub- 
lic benefit  and  necessity,  may  be  said  to  have  reached  perfection  in 
the  United  States,  inasmuch  as  all  available  grades  of  actually  raw 
sugars  from  below  No.  7,  D.  S.,  to  No.  13,  1).  S.,  in  color,  can  be 
refined  into  relative  grades  of  pure,  refined  sugars,  from  bright  yel- 
low to  pure  white  in  color;  each  grade  being  sold  to  consumers  at 
a  trifling  advance  above  the  cost  of  the  grade  of  raw  sugar  material 
from  which  the  refined  sugar  is  produced;  consequently  the  entire 
volume  of  imported  sugars — statements  about  which  will  be  found 
elsewhere — are  refined  and  consumed  in  this  country,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  a  very  small  quantity  of  refined  sugar  exported,  which 
exports  only  amounted  to  29,065,376  pounds,  valued  at  2,706,129 
dollars  in  the  fiscal  year  ended  June  30,  1880. 

The  cane  sugars  of  Louisiana  are  now  also  largely  refined  or 
semi-refined  before  reaching  consumers,  and  must  soon  be  wholly  so 
to  suit  their  tastes.  All  raw  beet  root  sugar  must  of  necessity  be 
refined,  in  order  to  eliminate  potash  and  other  saline  impurities,  and 
render  such  sugar  suitable  for  consumption.  Sorghum  sugar  must 
also  be  refined  tor  consumption  to  compete  in  quality  and  value  with 
cane  and  beet  sugars.  Sorghum  can,  however,  be  grown  profitably 
in  this  country  for  the  production  of  sorghum  syrup. 

Sixty  millions  of  dollars  are  directly  invested  in  Louisiana  and 
other  sections  of  this  country,  in  lands,  sugar  houses,  implements, 
and  machinery  used  for  the  growth  and  production  of  cane,  beet, 
maple  and  sorghum  sugars,  and  not  less  than  twenty  millious  of  dol- 
lars of  floating  capital  is  employed  in  moving  the  sugar-producing 
industries  of  the  country  we  live  in  ;  while  at  least  one  hundred 
thousand  people  thus  find  employment  upon  which  half  a  million  of 
people  depend  for  a  living.  Shall  growing  industries  like  these, 
which,  with  proper  encouragement  and  reasonable  protection,  could 
be  increased  enormously,  be  placed  at  the  mercy  of  foreign  sugar 
producers,  by  the  enactment  of  a  uniform  duty  to  No.  13,  D.  S.,  or 
a  specific  duty  on  all  sugars? 

Thirty  millions  of  dollars  ($30,000,000)  are  invested  in  lands, 
buildings,  and  machinery,  employed  in  refining  sugars  and  molasses 
in  this  country,  and  at  least  twenty  millions  of  dollars  ($20,000,000) 
of  floating  capital  is  necessarily  employed  annually  in  moving  this 
and  outgrowing  industries,  aside  from  the  first  cost  of  the  sugars  and 
molasses  used  in  refining.  Consumers  of  refined  sugar  in  this  coun- 
try pay  scarcely  a  fraction  more  therefor  than  the  original  cost  of 
the  imported  sugars,  so  completely  and  skillfully  has  the  machinery 
and  business  of  refining  sugars  been  perfected  in  the  United  States, 
under  the  stimulouB  of  healthful  competition.  Healthful  protection 
of  these,  home  industries,  in  the  interests  of  consumers  and  producers 
of  sugar  in  this  country,  simply  means  self  preservation. 

Tabular  Statements  will  be  found  elsewhere,  which  show  that  we 
purchased  83  percent,  of  the  foreign  sugars  consumed  in  this  coun- 


try  in  the  fiscal  year  ended  June  30,  1879,  from  Cuba,  Porto  Rico, 
and  other  Spanish  possessions,  and  only  17  per  cent,  from  all  other 
sugar-producing  countries,  including  the  Sandwich  Islands.  The 
West  Indies,  were  not  content  with  supplying  us  with  raw  sugars; 
greed  of  gain  and  tariff  facilities  furnished  by  depending  entirely  upon 
the  color  standard  for  levying  duty,  led  Cuba  and  Demerara  to  manu- 
facture melada  and  drained  raw  sugars  into  large,  dry,  almost  pure 
crystals;  by  clarification,  vacuum  pan  boiling,  and  centrifugation,and 
induced  the  producers  to  outwardly  discolor  the  sugar  crystals  while 
completing  the  vacuum  pan  and  centrifugal  process,  for  the  purpose 
of  evading  duty  on  the  actual  or  intrinsic  color,  quality,  and  value  of 
sugars  known  as  centrifugals,  by  false  classification  for  duty  when 
entering  this  market. 

Centrifugals,  or  semi-refined  foreign  sugars,  are  consequently 
manufactured  and  doctored  in  Cuba  and  Demerara  for  this  market, 
at  an  extra  expense  to  American  consumers  of  at  least  one  and  one- 
half  (1  J)  cents  per  pound  more  than  the  industry  would  cost  in  this 
country;  in  other  words,  American  refiners  can  profitably  produce 
centrifugals  from  melada  and  low  grades  of  raw  sugars,  exclusive  of 
cost  of  raw  sugars,  for  one  cent  per  pound  or  less,  while  we  pay  Cuba 
and  Demerara  about  3  cents  per  pound  for  raw  material,  and  2|  to 
3  cents  per  pound  for  Cuban  industry,  or  5|  to  6  cents  per  pound  in 
the  country  of  production,  for  dry  centrifugals,  outwardly  discolored 
to  represent  low  grade  raw  sugars,  and  thus  evade  duty.  The  sharp 
practice  also  deprives  us  of  more  or  less  melada  and  low  grades  of 
drained  raw  sugars,  with  which  we  should  otherwise  be  more  ex- 
tensively and  cheaply  supplied  by  Cuba  and  other  Spanish  posses- 
sions than  we  now  are. 

Imported  centrifugal  sugars  assimilate  intrinsically  to  refined 
sugars.  However  skillfully  the  intrinsic  color,  quality,  and  value 
of  centrifugals  may  be  disguised  by  outwardly  discoloring  the  crys- 
tals in  order  to  falsely  represent,  No.  7  or  No.  10  Dutch  standard  in 
color  and  evade  proper  duty,  the  simple  process  of  grinding  cargo 
samples  of  such  sugar  produces,  instead  of  No.  7,  D.  S.,  a  disguised 
No.  16,  D.  S.,  sugar;  instead  of  No.  10,  D.  S.,  a  disguised  No.  20, 
D.  S.,  sugar ;  and  instead  of  No.  13,  D.  S.,  a  beautiful  pure 
white  sugar  above  No.  20,  D.  S.,  in  color,  98  to  99J  per  cent,  pure 
cane  sugar  crystals  ;  whereas  the  same  grinding  process  applied  to 
cargo  samples  of  No.  7,  No.  10,  No.  13,  D.  S.,  raw  sugars  of  all  kinds 
naturally  produced  merely  by  boiling,  evaporation,  and  draining, 
produces  no  effect  upon  the  color  of  such  sugars  as  outwardly  rep- 
resented, simply  because  actually  raw  sugars  contain  the  molasses 
and  dark  impurities  which  have  been  eliminated  from  foreign  cen- 
trifugal sugars  by  semi-refining. 

From  Cuban  and  Demerara  centrifugals  only  the  very  highest 
grades  of  refined  sugar  can  be  made,  such  as  granulated  and  stand- 
ard A  sugars;  thus  unless  we  can  obtain  raw  sugar  material  from 


8 

other  countries,  the  great  mass  of  consumers  would  be  without  any 
adequate  supply  of  cheap  sugar  food,  which  refiners  can  only  obtain 
from  low  grades  of  raw  sugar  and  melada.  Centrifugal  sugars  doc- 
tored in  color,  as  at  present,  to  evade  duty,  or  admitted  under  a  uni- 
form duty  to  No.  13,  or  even  to  No.  10,  D.  S.,  or  under  a  specific 
duty  on  all  sugars,  absolutely  prohibit  the  importation  of  all  raw 
"Grocers'  Sugars,"  and  undersell  Louisiana  sugars;  a  No.  13,  D. 
S.,  and  often  a  No.  10,  D.  S.,  foreign  centrifugal  sugar,  being,  when 
ground,  far  whiter  and  purer  than  the  best  raw  "  Grocer's  Sugar," 
and  equal  to  the  best  Louisiana  sugar;  consequently  the  Cuban 
centrifugal  is  made  cheaper  than  either,  by  duty  discrimination. 
Other  evils,  resulting  from  these  attempts  of  foreigners  and  their 
American  allies,  to  centrifugate  and  regulate  our  sugar  tariff  to  suit 
themselves,  are  depicted  elsewhere,  together  with  data,  deductions, 
evidences,  and  statements  proving  that  a  simple,  practicable,  and 
effectual  remedy  presents  itself  in  an  actual  ad  valorem  sugar  tariff 
rigidly  enforced,  or  in  the  present  tariff,  with  the  addition  thereto, 
of  the  Polariscope  test,  and  grinding,  as  adjuncts  to  the  Dutch  stand- 
ard, for  levying  duty  correctly. 


SECTION  SECOND. 

Sugar  imports  from,  and  trade  with  producing  countries. 

Fifty  millions  of  American  consumers  of  sugar,  thousands  of 
American  sugar  producers,  refiners  of  sugar,  and  the  outgrowing 
American  industries,  that  employ  continuously  one  hundred  millions 
of  dollars  capital,  and  more  than  a  hundred  thousand  employees, 
upon  whose  labor  returns  at  least  three  quarters  of  a  million  of  peo- 
ple in  this  country  depend  for  a  living,  are  vitally  concerned  in 
the  palpable  facts  presented  in  the  following  exhibit  and  explana- 
tions bearing  upon  sugar  consumption,  production,  and  sugar  tariff 
plans. 

The  following  table  exhibits  the  amount  of  sugars  imported,  as 
per  invoice  entries,  from  countries  of  production,  and  the  amount 
of  domestic  merchandise,  exclusive  of  specie,  exported  to  said  coun- 
tries in  the  fiscal  year  ended  June  30,  1879  ;  showing  the  importance 
and  necessity  to  prosperity,  of  encouraging  and  extending  trade  with 
remote  as  well  as  contiguous  sugar-producing  countries,  in  order  to 
obtain  abundant,  supplies  of  cheap  raw  sugar  material  i'ov  the  pro- 
duction of  cheap  refined  sugars  for  consumption,  at  the  lowest  prices, 
payable,  so  tin-  as  practicable,  in  American  merchandise  instead  of 
American  gold  : 


1879. 

Imports  sugar. 

Value. 

Pounds. 

Dollars. 

Belgium 

2,253,786 

114,606 

Brazil 

63,380,355 

2,274,450 

Cent.  Amer 

3,640,174 

155,108 

China 

714,957 

36,419 

Danish  VV.  I  __ 

4,899,509 

186,054 

French  Poss 

70,863,119 

2,564,810 

France 

9,443 

672 

Germany 

466,664 

22,232 

Br.  Honduras__ 

1,036.561 

39,210 

Br.  Westlnd__ 

33.415,713 

1,184.933 

Br.  Guiana 

13,074,378 

480,782 

Br.  East  Ind__ 

3,499,852 

119,701 

Br.  Columbia.. 

7,055 

486 

Br.   Africa,  &c. 

1,115,889 

41,371 

Hong   Kong 

962,550 

37,210 

Canadas 

2,011,386 

83,795 

England 

4,034,058 

173,980 

Havti 

17,757 

873 

Liberia 

3,925 

217 

Mexico 

1,967,841 

76,413 

Dutch  W.  I 

209,659 

6,387 

Dutch  Guiana  _ 

3,469,151 

106.235 

Dutch  E.  I 

47,415,776 

1,992.975 

Peru 

2,018,047 

74.235 

San   D.nningo-- 

7,922,211 

291,886 

U.  S.  Colombia. 

369,141 

14,225 

Venezuela 

8,391 

396 

Cuba 

1,275,838,692 

50,732,738 

Porto  Kico 

84,704,473 

3,120.960 

Spanish  Poss 

112,450,478 

3,895,398 

Hawaiian  Isl'ds 

41,696,674 

2,807,675 

1879.                                   Exports  mdse. 
Dollars. 
Belgium 27,470,003 


Brazil 

Central  America 

China 

Danish  W.  1 

French  Possessions. 
France 


8,106,928 
1  110,603 
2,651,677 
886,857 
2,551,159 
58,194,041 

Germany 56,164,394 

Br.  Honduras 293,762 

Br.    W.  Indies 6,485,391 

Br.  Guiana 1,719,827 

Br.  E.  Indies 1,142.196 

Briti.-h  Columbia 1,201,986 

Br.    Africa,  &c _.       2,168,076 

Hong  Kong 3,279,277 

Canadas 25,970,070 

England 281,665,645 


Hayti 

Liberia  

Mexico 

Dutch  W.  Indies 

Dutch  Guiana 

Dutch  E.  Indies 

Peru 

San  Domingo 

U.  S.  Colombia 

Venezuela 

Cuba 12,201,691 

Porto   Kico 1,771,483 

Spanish  Possessions 313,954 

Hawaiian   Islands 2,288,178 


3,148,757 

129,790 

5,400.380 

622,171 

167,130 

1,477,510 

1,293,991 

728,738 

5,199,648 

1,926,923 


Total  sugars_l,783,477,715     70,636,432  I  made  up  as  follows 


Of  brown  sugars,     1,741,650,489  pounds,  valued  at $67,820,101 

Of  refined  sugars,  130,552  pounds,  valued  at 8,656 

Of  Hawaiian  sugars,      41,696,674  pounds,  valued  at 2,807,676 


To  the  above  imports,  as  per  entries  of  dry  sugars,  must  be  added 


1879.  Melada.  Value. 
Pounds. 

Central  America 9,800  $178 

Danish  W.  I 33,202  778 

British  W.I 708,740  19,3h0 

Dutch  Guiana 23,552  442 

Venezuela 8,820  262 


1879. 

Peru 

San  Domingo 

Cuba 

Porto  Pvico... 
Total 


Melada. 

Potinds. 

200,619 

464,808 

49,436,292 

2,288 

50,888,121 


Value. 

$5,504 
13,873 

1,401,771 
68 

1,442,256 


Total  sugar  and  melada  imported 1,834,365,836  pounds,  value  $72,078,688 

By  the  above  table,  classified  and  compiled  from  official  records, 
it  will  be  seen  that  of  the  entire  volume  of  sugar  and  melada  im- 
ported during  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1879,  we  imported 
from — 

Pounds.  Value. 

Cuba  and  Spanish  possessions 1,522.432,223  $59,150,935 

Fromall  other  countries 311,933,613  12,927,753 

Total  sugar  and  melada 1,834,365,836  $72,078,688 

2 


10 

In  plain  language,  we  purchased  eighty-three  (83)  per  cent,  of  all 
sugars  and  melada  imported,  in  1879,  from  Cuba,  Porto  Rico,  and 
other  Spanish  possessions,  and  only  seventeen  (17)  per  cent,  from 
all  other  countries,  although  all  other  sugar  producing  countries 
from  whence  we  imported  sugars  in  that  fiscal  year,  are  by  com- 
parison relatively  far  more  generous  consumers  of  American  mer- 
chandise than  are  Cuba,  Porto  Rico,  and  other  Spanish  possessions, 
which  countries  only  purchased  merchandise  amounting  to  $14,287,- 
128  in  the  fiscal  year  named,  and  compelled  us  to  pay  additional 
$44,863,807  specie  and  American  securities,  or  in  all  $59,150,935 
for  sugar  and  melada  alone. 

Under  existing  circumstances,  and  with  full  knowledge  that  we 
can  be  more  amply  supplied  with  raw  sugar  material  at  the  lowest 
prices  consistent  with  profitable  production  in  foreign  sugar  pro- 
ducing countries  by  extending  our  dealings  with,  and  purchasing 
sugars  from,  remote  countries  as  well  as  from  Cuba,  Porto  Rico, 
&c,  it  would  be  a  legislative  blunder  to  enact  any  uniform  or  specific  tariff' 
on  imported  sugars,  because  all  such  enactments  would  favor  the 
production  of  semi-refined  centrifugal  sugars  in  Cuba  and  Demerara, 
doctored  for  the  American  market. 

This  would  deprive  us  of  melada  and  low  grades  of  raw  sugar 
from  those  countries,  all  of  which  would  be  made  into  dry  centri- 
fugals or  semi-refined  sugars,  in  order  to  obtain  from  American 
consumers  the  highest  prices  for  foreign  industry  and  centrifugated 
sugars,  while  only  the  lowest  rate  of  duty  would  be  paid  us  on  a  less 
number  of  pounds  of  centrifugals  than  we  should  require  of  actual 
raw  sugar  and  melada  for  refining  the  numerous  grades  of  sugar 
now  required  for  consumption;  thus  reducing  the  number  of  car- 
goes of  sugar  that  would  be  imported  were  an  ad  valorem  sugar 
tariff' enacted. 

In  continuation  of  the  No.  13,  D.  S.,  uniform  specific  sugar  duty 
plans  of  the  Cuban,  English,  Demerara  and  hard  sugar  refiner's 
junto,  of  which  the  Tucker  sugar  bill  is  a  subtle  modification, 
American  cane,  beet  and  sorghum  sugar  producing  industries,  which 
can  successfully  compete  with  all  foreign  actual  low  grade  sugars, 
would  be  crushed  in  endeavors  to  compete  with  foreign  se mi- re- 
fined centrifugal  sugars  of  highest  grade,  which  are  virtually  tit  for 
consumption,  made  so  by  cheap  foreign  labor:  under  any  uniform 
or  specific  tariff  on  sugar,  low  grades  of  raw  sugar  material  would 
be  prohibited  to  us,  and  find  a  market  in  Cuba  and  Demerara,  to 
be  converted  into  dry  centrifugals,  doctored  for  the  American 
market;  thus  also  legalizing  the  discoloration  practices  which 
trouble  us  under  the  present  tariff,  with  only  the  color  standard  for 
levying  duty  on  sugar,  with  which  to  defend  our  industries  and 
revenue;  an  actual  ad  valorem  tariff  on  sugars,  or  the  present  tariff 
with  additional  provision  for  determining  their  market  value  by 
analysis,  polarization,  grinding  and  the  color  standard  would  be  ab- 


11 

solutely  equitable,  protective  and  practicable,  and  would  benefit 
American  industries,  and  enormously  increase  consumption  and 
sugar  production  in  this  country. 


SECTION  THIRD. 


Classifications  of  Sugars  for  Duty  under  the  Dutch  Standard  for  the 
Fiscal  Years  Ending  June  30,  1873,  1876,  '77,  '78,  '79,  '80. 

False  classifications  for  duty,  by  outward  discoloration  of  foreign 
sugars,  to  evade  full  payment  of  the  duty,  that  could  be  properly 
collected  by  the  Dutch  standard,  if  the  actual  or  intrinsic  color  and 
quality  of  the  sugar  was  not  outwardly  disguised,  would  be  imprac- 
ticable under  an  actual  ad  valorem  sugar  tariff,  but  can  be  continued 
at  pleasure  under  the  "Carlisle  bill,"  or  the  modified  "Tucker 
bill,"  which  ignores  "No.  10,  D.  S.,  and  American  industries,  pro- 
tects Cuban  centrifugals, and  prohibits  low  grades  and  "grocer's  su- 
gars" effectually.  The  following  exhibit  of  classifications  of  sugar 
for  duty  disposes  of  some  of  the  pretenses  of  the  No.  13,  D.  S.,  or 
uniform  specific  sugar  duty  advocates,  exposes  the  extent  of  dis- 
coloration practices,  and  in  the  more  honest  classifications  of  1880 
clearly  shows  the  good  effects  of  the  writer's  analyses  of  the  sugar 
question,  and  the  better  enforcement  of  tariff' laws  resulting  there- 
from : 


12 


oo»5  §  i>3> 

1 

c 

s§ 

a 

p 

'= 

s 

£ 

- 

oa 

io 

a, 

ft 

CO 

o 

E 

3 

"3 

ISB3*" 

set 
X 

cn 

o 

CN 

> 

gtt« 

i- 

"■" 

se 

w 

lO  —  CO  1C  h-  => 

; 

S 

00 

r 

i 

1 

i" 

§ 

01i2gs 

;? 

Oi 

1 

in  ^>  cr  cc  t~  oo 

s 

too  or  ic  —  n 

s 

3 

gg!t&s~ 

IN 

ec 

s 

P 

acs* 

IS 

rt 

s 

£X§ou,| 

s 

—        00 

-rK/  /-  c  i 

o 

2 

eS 
> 

e  coo 

a 

—      o 

-f  h-  X  Ol  X  CO 

C  I  V-  :-  r:  , -  I  - 

^  00  o  oc  l~  T  CS 

Tf 

s 

OS 

s 

■si^s^a 

? 

- 

M 

C  X  l--'-.o 

* 

CO 

3 

:-oooh 

s 

ce 
OS 

l 

>> 

i 

o 
S5 

OS 

EC 

EC 

3 

g 

P 

gj.,0-. 

9 

~ 

a 

M"  -»  —  OS  00  "M 

OO 

nr 

§ 

fc 

a 

gSSPSSs*' 

:-: 

So 

00 

> 

q*co%>'  ed 

i  - 

"* 

CM  —  CM  r  r  — 

-. 

•M 

j.t--'M:';c;c 

$ 

U5 

3 

tjjj^gr; 

- 

OO 

g./f -r  /     /•    tcc 

3 

o  r  r  c  .  i.? 

v 

55 

o 

1 

• 

3 
I 

:    ;  03  DO  DQ    : 

:Q«22S  = 

•3o    .         .«3 

3 

vi'CCCO 

j 

-r  -  Z  CD  0)  CD  <D 

.2      • 

L«  ffl  >  ►  >  .0 

■£,*  >  o  sjS 

i  •§ 

p 

a 

«^r.^ 

3    a 

> 

x  =  _  S  H  S  ^ 

§  5 

c'    -0  =  =  =  3 

& 

2    1 

^ 

e  0  -  *  cd  rt— ' 

a 

2 

S-  S  d  o  6  d  d 

T3 

■o    ft 

4)        bJO 

% 

Hfefefefefe 

CD       en 

< 

* 

3 
| 

^  —   CD  CD  Ol  CD  CO 

*»  o  o  e  o  o 

<-£££££ 

O 

Eh 

I 

^ 

c«  S  Cfl  CS  si 

« 

«x««x-: 

P      ;  ec5- 


S^IISS II  § 


■'X  fj  ri  tZ   I  oo  oc 

•6  eo" 

Is  I 

I   O  <fe 


oiix-i  -h      c? 

CCTOH  |     O  0_ 

— '  rj  co" 


|§«i§3 1§  I 
sart        its 


O  : :  ■ J  —  :  "i    I  r1. 


■*• 


iS 


.  •  ,  CN  ^T  1C  o  —  >o  CO  r^ 

^  '  .  oc  e»  ic  ^  -m  ■Si  cc  K 

S  I     •§ r'sV'e'ts  — "  o." 

a  =Ot>r-yM-  its  ic 


§ 


'eotjif 


1  ill 

His 


=•  5  =  5?  ci  §  r? 

— ;  or  ■  7  oo  t  x.  o 

~  -ic  c-'i^cc'  o" 

—  cr  —  i~  «  —  / 

■  C  7i  —  o 


NCC-XT- 

J  —  x  'r  —  c  ?i 

'§*=''»«"•*=*» 

3^CK  '^  >C  -N 

-=  O  "C  CM  H 

;   '■  1  '     \ 

o22Sa 

T 

^-•:c:s 

f-^zjzsSr.t; 

■C3  C  „,  0)  CD  CD  oj 

•£^c=i2g 

^•=srtc4rt^ 

JBOggg« 

l-xl5l= 

g-?  o  -  o  6  d 

^  ■£   CD  d,  CD  CD  CD 

c<  o.  >   >   :■    > 

C  £  £  £  £  ^ 

ct  e«  cj  Sd 

I  IIS 


s  5 


13 

By  the  above  exhibit  of  classifications  of  sugar  for  duty,  it  will 
be  seen  that  the  pretense  that  a  uniform  duty  to  No.  13,  D.  S.,  is 
required  for  any  legitimate  purpose  is  most  absurd.  Under  the  ap- 
proximately honest  classifications  for  duty  in  1873  and  1880,  seen 
above,  the  great  volume  of  sugars,  required  for  refining  purposes, 
are  not  above  No.  10,  D.  S.,  in  color  and  intrinsic  quality;  that  is 
they  are,  or  should  naturally  be,  the  lower  grades  of  raw  sugar 
material  ranging  from  No.  4  to  No.  10,  D.  S.,  in  intrinsic  color, 
and  coutain  from  70  to  90  per  cent,  of  crystals ;  the  balance  of  the 
100  per  cent,  consisting  of  water,  molasses  impurities  and  organic 
matter.  It  is  evident  that  all  such  sugars,  upon  which  refiners  de- 
pend almost  entirely  to  obtain  correspondingly  numerous  and  cheap 
grades  of  refined  sugars,  required  to  suppl}'  the  great  mass  of  Amer- 
ican consumers  of  sugar,  should  be  encouraged  to  enter  this  market 
on  an  equal  footing  with  dry  centrifugals  as  to  intrinsic  value. 

Furthermore,  as  appears  in  the  above  tables  of  classifications,  not 
only  are  the  imports  of  sugars  above  No.  10,  D.  S.,  by  comparison 
small  in  quantity — although  their  full  volume  does  not  appear — but 
being  mostly  dry  centrifugals  or  semi-refined  sugars,  testing  from 
94  to  99  in  crystals,  their  intrinsic  or  market  value  approximates 
that  of  refined  sugars  which  should  certainly  pay  duty  on  their 
actual  value.  The  cost  of  refining  dry  centrifugal  sugars  does  not 
exceed  25  cents  to  35  cents  per  100  pounds,  as  against  65  cents  to 
100  cents  per  100  pounds  cost  of  refining  ordinary  and  low  grades 
of  foreign  raw  sugars. 

Refiners  of  sugars  with  limited  facilities,  or  who  only  care  to  pro- 
duce granulated  and  standard  A  refined  sugars — "because  there  is 
more  money  in  it,"  with  less  investment  of  brains,  capital  and 
skill — unquestionably  desire  to  purchase  and  work  dry  centrifugal 
sugars  in  preference  to  actual  raw  sugar  material  ;  and  therefore 
advocate  specific  duty  on  all  sugars  not  above  No.  13,  D.  S.,  in 
color,  because  such  a  tariff,  and  any  specific  or  uniform  tariff,  would 
discriminate  enormously  in  their  favor;  but  above  all  individual  in- 
terests must  be  considered  the  combined  interests  of  fifty  millions 
of  American  consumers  of  sugars,  and  home  sugar  productive  in- 
dustries, which  can  be  greatly  benefitted  and  best  protected  in  the 
matter  of  sugar-food  by  admitting,  without  discrimination,  all 
grades  of  foreign  sugars  under  the  present  tariff  properly  executed, 
.or  an  actual  ad  valorem  sugar  tariff. 

Again,  the  pretense  that  under  a  specific  duty  on  all  sugars,  or 
under  a  uniform  duty  on  all  sugars  not  above  No.  13,  D.  S.,  in 
color,  "grocer's  sugar"  can  be  imported  for  immediate  consump- 
tion, is  grossly  false.  In  these  days  of  industrial  advancements, 
consumers  are  best  suited  with  refined  sugars;  raw  sugar  below 
No.  16,  D.  S.,  in  intrinsic  and  outward  color,  would  not  be  eaten, 
and  not  a  pound  of  such  sugar,  or  any  other  entirely  raw  "  grocer's 
sugar,"  could  be  imported  under  a  uniform  or  specific  tariff,  to  com- 


14 

pete  with  the  refined  product  of  dry  centrifugal  sugars  testing  94 
to  99  in  pure  crystals,  but  by  outward  discoloration  of  crystals 
entered  as  No.  7,  No.  10,  or  not  above  No.  13,  D.  8.,  in  color;  there- 
fore any  uniform  or  specific  tariff  on  sugar,  favors  centrifugal  sugars, 
and  is  absolutely  prohibitory  to  grocer's  sugars,  as  well  as  to  low 
grades  of  raw  sugar,  of  which  our  importations  should  largely  con- 
sist, in  order  that  our  refiners  of  sugars  may  at  all  times  produce 
an  adequate  supply  of  cheap,  refined  sugars,  and  thus  check  the 
growing  practice  of  using  corn  glucose  to  adulterate  high  grades  of 
refined  sugar;  the  only  outturn  possible  from  dry  centrifugal 
sugars,  which  have  so  long  evaded  the  tariff  laws  by  discoloration 
and  false  classifications,  being  high  grades  of  refined  sugar. 

Under  an  ad  valorem  sugar  tariff,  or  under  the  present  tariff 
properly  executed,  the  outturn  of  refiners,  having  all  grades  of  raw 
material  available  on  an  equal  footing  as  to  cost,  would  naturally 
increase  the  grades,  and  reduce  the  cost  of  refined  sugars  to  Amer- 
ican consumers,  until  the  use  of  glucose  would  be  confined  to  more 
legitimate  purposes  than  that  of  adulterating  and  debasing  refined 
cane  sugar  to  supply  the  masses,  as  an  offset  to  cheap  sugars  made 
dear  by  discoloration  practices,  and  consequent  virtual  prohibition 
of  actual  low  grade  raw  sugar  material,  from  which  alone  we  must 
obtain  the  cheap  refined  sugars  now  required  for  consumers;  there- 
fore, in  order  to  increase  consumption  and  cheapen  refined  cane 
sugars  to  consumers,  and  in  order  to  import  raw  "grocer's  sugars," 
if  anybody  wants  such,  and  all  other  grades  at  pleasure,  an  ad  va- 
lorem sugar  tariff,  or  additional  safeguard  for  the  present  tariff, 
becomes  indispensibly  necessary. 

Attention  is  further  directed  to  the  above  table  of  classifications 
for  1880,  wherein,  while  it  will  be  seen  that  the  writer's  analyses 
and  palpable  exposure  of  discoloration  practices  to  defraud  the 
revenue,  has  resulted  in  raising  the  class  of  centrifugal  sugars 
hitherto  disguised  as  not  above  No.  7,  D.  S.,  in  color,  to  above  No. 
7,  D.  S.;  but  that,  as  yet,  such  sugars  have  not  been  raised  to  above 
No.  10,  D.  S.,  where  they  in  reality  largely  belong.  The  improve- 
ment is,  however,  marked,  and  has  saved  the  people  more  than  two 
millions  of  dollars  of  revenue  from  sugar  in  one  year;  nothing  but 
grinding,  analyses  and  polarization  in  aid  of  the  Dutch  standard 
and  present  tariff,  or  an  actual  ad  valorem  sugar  tariff,  can  wholly 
suppress  discoloration  practices,  and  adequately  protect  the  inter- 
ests of  American  consumers,  home-productive  industries,  and 
revenue. 


15 


SECTION  FOURTH. 

Hawaiian  Sugars  Duty  Free;  Results  of  Reciprocity ;  Statements  which 
Evidence  Results  Adverse  to  American  Interests. 

Attention  is  respectfully  directed  to  the  workings  of  the  recipro- 
city treaty  between  the  United  States  and  Hawaii,  in  the  matter  of 
admitting  so-called  Hawaiian  sugars  to  this  country,  duty  free, 
while  sugars  from  all  other  sugar-producing  countries  are  heavily 
taxed.  The  subject  in  its  relations  to  the  great  sugar  question  de- 
mands the  earnest  attention  and  proper  action  of  Congress  and  the 
Executive.  Although  the  amount  of  sugar  imported  from  Hawaii 
is  comparatively  small,  it  is  large  enough  to  furnish  means  to  en- 
hance and  control  prices  of  sugars  to  American  consumers  on  our 
Pacific  coast,  and  invite  the  landing  of  large  quantities  of  China 
and  Hong-Kong  sugars  at  Hawaii,  to  be  re-shipped  to  San  Francisco 
as  Hawaiian  sugars,  duty  free;  while  we  pay  dear  for  such  sugars, 
lose  the  duty  thereon,  and  receive  no  adequate  return;  which 
becomes  palpably  plain  in  the  following  exhibit: 

Hawaiian  Sugars,  Duty  Free,  Entered  into   Consumption  in  the  Fiscal  Years  Ending 
June  SO,  1878,  1879,  1880; 

Value. 

1878.  Above  No.    7,  not  above  No.  10,  Dutch  Standard,    2,437,920  pounds       $161,922 
Above    "    10,         "  "  13,  "  10,805,2x3       "  757,735 

Above    "    13,         "  •'  16,  "  12,227.780       "  963,549 

Above    "    16,         "  »  20,  "  4,897,345       "  391,224 


Total  consumed,  duty  free 30:368,328  $2,274,430 

Above  No.    7,  not  above  No.  10,  Dutch  standard,    8,174,146  pounds  $501,850 

Above    "    10,         "            "   13,               "                16,615,686       "  1,099,164 

Above    "     13,         "            "  16,               "                15,670,564       "  1,118,117 

Above    "    16,         "            "  20,               "                  1,232,673       "  92,061 


Total  consumed,  duty  f"ree 41,693,069  "  $2,811,192 

1880.  Above  No.    7,  not  above  No.  10,  Dutch  standard,     7,793,349  "  450,030 

Above    "    10,         <:            "   13,               "                28,416.596  "  1,892,737 

Above    "    13,         "            "  16,               "                23,868,886  "  1,689,060 

Above    "    16,         "            "  20,               "                  1,477,493  "  103,659 


Total  consumed,  duty  free 61,556,324        "        $4,135,486 

Total  Hawaiian  sugars,  entered  into  consumption  during  the  three 
fiscal  years  ending  June  30,  1878,  1879,  1880,  value,  duty  lost,  esti- 
mated at  60  per  cent,  ad  valorem,  and  total  value  of  domestic  mer- 
chandise, exclusive  of  specie,  exported  to  Hawaii  during  the  same 
years. 


16 

Hawaiian  Sugars  Duiy  free.  Value.  Duty  Lost.  Dom.  Mdse.  to  Hawaii. 

1878—  30,368,32*  Pounds.  $2,274,430  $1,364,658                      $1,683,446 

1879—  41,693,069         "  2,811,192  1,686,715                          2,288,178 

1880—  61,556,324         ■'  4,135,486  2,481,291                        1,985,506 

Total— 133,617,721         "  9,221,108       $5,532,664  $5,957,130 

Average  price  paid  for  sugar  in  Hawaii,  three  years,  per  100  pounds $6.75 

Average  price  paid  for  sugar  in  other  countries,  1880,  per  100  pounds 4  20 

Average  price  paid  for  sugar  in   Hawaii,  1880,  per  100  pcunds 6.71 

By  the  above  exhibit  of  facts,  officially  verified,  and  palpable  de- 
ductions therefrom,  two  subjects  of  vital  importance  to  American 
interests  present  matter  for  grave  consideration  in  connection  with 
the  sugar  question : 

First.  The  apparently  rapid  increase  in  sugar  production  and 
exports  to  this  country  in  the  Sandwich  or  Hawaiian  Islands,  under 
the  Reciprocity  Treaty,  exceeds  relatively  that  of  all  other  sugar  pro- 
ducing countries  in  this  regard.  The  Islands  of  Hawaii  send  most 
of  their  sugars  to  this  country.  We  received  from  them  in  1878, 
30,368,328  pounds;  in  1879,41,693,069  pounds;  in  1880,61,556,324 
pounds;  meantime  China  and  Hong  Kong,  where  sugar  production 
is  extensive  and  regular  in  increase, — 

Supplied  this  country  with  21,677,177  pounds  ot  sugar  in  1877  ; 

Supplied  this  country  with  31,695,743  pounds  of  sugar  in  1878  ; 

But  this  supply  fell  to  only  1,677,507  pounds  of  sugar  in  1879, — 
in  which  year  Hawaii  increased  her  exports  to  us  by  20,000,000 
of  pounds.  China  sugars  are  largely  above  No.  7,  D.  S.,  in  color, 
and  correspond  in  color  with  many  grades  of  sugar  imported  from 
Hawaii,  while  the  falling  off  of  imports  of  sugars  from  China  and 
Hong  Kong  in  1879  corresponds  with  the  wonderful  increase  of  im- 
ports of  sugars  from  Hawaii  in  1880.  The  temptation  to  buy  China 
and  Hong  Kong  sugars  in  those  countries,  at  about  2£  to  3  cents 
per  pound,  and  land  them  at  Hawaii,  to  be  reshipped  thence  to  this 
country  as  Hawaiian  sugars,  duty  free,  at  6|  cents  per  pound,  is  not 
only  very  great,  but  the  opportunity  is  supplied  by  the  Reciprocity 
Treaty  between  the  United  States  and  the  Kingdom  of  Hawaii. 

Second.  Taking  the  article  of  sugar  imported  from  Hawaii,  duty 
free,  during  the  fiscal  years  1878,  1879,  1880,  the  people  of  this 
country  bought  sugars  to  the  amount  of  $9,221,108,  paying  $2.55  per 
100  pounds  more  than  similar  sugars  cost  us  in  the  great  cane  sugar- 
producing  country  of  the  world,  as  seen  above,  besides  losing 
$5,532,664  duty  on  sugars  imported  duty  free  from  Hawaii  in  the 
years  named,  under  a  Reciprocity  Treaty,  which  only  enabled  us 
to  sell  the  paltry  sum  of  $5,957,130  worth  of  domestic  merchandise 
to  llawaiiaus  during  the  above-named  fiscal  years,  1878,  '9,  '80. 

Thus,  under  the  Treaty,  we  have  thrown  away  $5,582,66-1  sugar 
duty,  paid  an  extra  price  for  sugar,  and  been  obliged  to  pay  a  cash 
balance,  over  and  above  our  $5,957,130  exports  of  merchandise  to 


17 

Hawaii,  of  $3,263,978  for  the  single  article  of  sugar  ;  in  plain  words, 
the  loss  of  duty  on  sugar  and  other  merchandise  imported  from 
Hawaii  free,  annually  exceeds  the  value  of  our  exports  to  the 
Hawaiian  Islands ;  while  the  importation  of  Hawaiian  sugars  duty 
free  at  San  Francisco  only  serves  to  injure  home  production,  keep 
out  competing  sugars,  and  enhance  the  cost  of  refined  sugars  to  con- 
sumers in  California  and  sections  of  country  contiguous  to  our 
Pacific  coast.  Hawaiian  sugars  should  unquestionably  be  made 
dutiable. 


SECTION  FIFTH. 

Practicability  of  an  ad  valorem  sugar  tariff ' ;  Eleven  years  sugar  statis- 
tics further  prove  its  equity  ;  The  present  tariff  with  Polariscope  tests; 
Summary,  dec. 

The  objections  to  an  ad  valorem  sugar  tariff' are  found  by  analysis 
to  be  largely  ephemeral.  Unlike  books,  dry  goods,  and  merchan- 
dise having  no  specific  current  market  value,  the  daily  market  quo- 
tations and  transactions  in  foreign  and  domestic  raw  and  refined 
sugars,  in  London,  Cuba  and  American  ports  of  entry,  like  our 
market  quotations  for  grain,  now  furnish  reliable  evidence  of  the 
actual  foreign  and  home  market  value  of  any  cargo  or  mark  of  sugar 
entered  or  offered  for  sale  in  this  market  on  any  given  day ;  and  its 
actual  market  value  in  the  country  of  production  at  the  time  of  pur- 
chase and  shipment,  is  quite  as  readily  determined  by  such  recorded 
evidence,  on  arrival  and  entry  of  sugars  for  duty  in  this  country. 
As  regards  foreign  sugars  consigned  to  agents  in  this  country,  the 
actual  market  value  of  the  sugar,  constitutes  and  determines  its  true 
value  for  levying  duty  correctly. 

Because  it  would  be  easier  for  well-paid  officials  to  collect  a  duty 
of  so  much  per  pound  on  all  sugars,  is  neither  a  valid  reason  for  in- 
flicting a  monstrous  abuse  and  extraordinary  food  tax  upon  the  peo- 
ple of  this  country  and  their  industries,  nor  for  transferring  Ameri- 
can sugar  productive  and  refining  industries  to  Cuba,  Demerara, 
England,  Canada,  and  Continental  Europe.  Prohibiting  the  im- 
portation of  low  grade  raw  sugar  material  by  a  specific  or  uniform 
duty  on  all  sugar,  and  thus  increasing  the  cost  of  pure,  refined,  cane 
sugars  to  consumers,  merely  to  enable  customs  officials  to  collect 
revenue  comfortably,  would  be  quickly  followed  by  a  resistless  pub- 
lic clamor  for  the  entire  abolition  of  duty  on  all  sugar  food ;  which 
would  be  disastrous  to  home  production  and  revenue,  and  of  no 
benefit  to  consumers  ;  as  Cuba  and  other  producing  countries  would 
levy  an  export  duty  on  sugars, — though  not  sufficient  to  protect  pro- 


18 

duction  here, — while  skillful  American  refiners  would  successfully 
compete  with  European  refiners,  and  find  ready  foreign  market  for 
refined  sugars,  which  would  enhance  prices  to  American  consumers. 

Although  the  market  value  of  imported  sugar  can,  in  these  days 
of  rapid  communication  aud  trade,  be  readily  determined  correctly, 
under  an  ad  valorem  sugar  tariff,  Congress  should  enact  adequate 
provisions  for  the  proper  execution  of  any  tariff'.  Samples  of  cargoes 
for  levying  duty  should  correspond  with  merchants'  samples  of  the 
same  cargoes  when  sold  or  offered  for  sale.  The  official  samples, 
with  cargo  descriptions,  date  of  entry,  test  of  sugar,  &c,  should  re- 
main on  public  exhibition  in  a  Custom  House  Sugar  Bureau,  until 
the  cargo  entry  has  been  liquidated,  and  for  a  period  of  not  less 
than  twenty  days  from  date  of  entry.  This  would  afford  ample 
time  to  determine  value. 

Samples  of  sugar  employed  for  levying  duty  on  the  cargo,  should 
be  ground  to  the  consistency  of  raw  muscovadoes  and  clayed  sugars, 
to  assimilate  in  grain  to  Dutch  standard  samples,  and  be  tested  by 
both  polarization  and  anahTsis,  for  which  there  would  be  ample  time 
before  liquidation  of  entries.  Such  tests  should  be  compared  with 
merchants'  and  refiners'  tests  of  the  same  cargoes  of  sugars,  which 
are  readily  learned,  in  order  to  detect  and  prevent  errors  in  levying 
duty.  The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  should  be  authorized  and  re- 
quired to  employ  such,  and  all  other  means  that  he  may  deem  neces- 
sary, to  accurately  determine  the  actual  market  value  of  sugars,  in 
order  to  levy  duty  thereon  correctly.  Prices  of  imported  sugars  as 
determined  for  New  York,  Boston,  Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  and 
San  Francisco,  should  determine  their  market  value  in  all  other 
ports  of  entry,  provided  home  valuation  is  employed  for  levying 
duty. 

The  following  tables  of  foreign  dutiable  sugars  entered  into  con- 
sumption for  eleven  fiscal  years  ended  June  30,  1880,  giving  quan- 
tity, value,  duty,  rate  of  duty,  ad  valorem  per  cent.,  and  exhibiting 
what  the  duty  receipts  would  have  been  under  an  ad  valorem  tariff 
of  50,  45  and  40  per  cent.,  furnish  reliable  and  valuable  informa- 
tion upon  which  legislative  calculations  in  regard  to  past,  present, 
and  future  revenue  from  sugar,  may  be  confidently  based.  The 
present  classification  sugar  tariff  is  that  of  1870,  modified  in  L875, 
by  a  horizontal  addendum  of  25  per  cent,  upon  the  regular  duty, 
with  the  use  of  the  Dutch  color  standard  only  for  levying  duty.  It 
is  as  follows  : 

On  all  sugar  not  above  No.     7  D.  S.  in  color,  per  lb.,  lfc.,  plus  25  per  Ct., — r2A  eents. 

Above  No.  7           "        No.  10  1).  S.         "             "      lie.,  "  26  "  2  J 

"     10        "       No.  13  D.  S.         «            "      Uo.,  '•  26  "  2U 

"     13         "        No.  16D.S.         "             "      2fc.,  "  25  "  BA 

"     10        »       No.  20 D.  S.         »            "      ::](•.,  »  26  "  4^ 

On  all  sugar  above         No.  20  D.  S.        "            »«      4  e.,  "  25  "  5           " 

On  all  cane  syrup,  melada,  tank  bottoms,  etc      Ik.,  "  25  "  1;          " 

On  molasses,  per  gallon 5  o.,  "  25  "  6{          " 


19 

Under  the  above  classification  tariff — which,  having  no  proper 
safe  guards  against  frauds,  foreign  skill  has  successfully  subverted 
by  discoloration  practices,  for  which  legal  protection  is  now  sought 
in  No.  13,  D.  S.,  bills,  and  destruction  to  American  sugar-produc- 
ing industries,  and  the  hopes  of  consumers  threatened  by  specific 
duty  on  all  sugar,  bills — the  following  results  have  been  achieved  : 

Foreign  dutiable  sugars,  exclutive  of  melada,  entered  into  con- 
sumption during  the  fiscal  years,  each  ending  June  30, 1870  to  1880, 
inclusive,  quantity,  value,  duty,  rates  per  pound,  ad  valorem  rate, 
and  the  same  at  40, 45  and  50  per  cent.,  compiled  for  ready  reference  : 


Fiscal 

Dutiable  sugars 

Value 

Duty  paid. 

Ad  valorem 

years. 

consumed. 

declared. 

Liquidated. 

per  cent. 

Pounds. 

1870 

1,183,089,146 

$59,021,588 

$35,986,347 

3.04 

60.97 

1871 

1,166,394,287 

58,382,938 

29,690,552 

2.54 

50.85 

1872 

1,346,942,550 

73,318,299 

27,876,769 

2.07 

38.02 

1873 

1,378,498.832 

74,993,073 

28,226,309 

2.05 

37.63 

1874 

1.511,456.915 

76,080,510 

30,492,526 

2.02 

40.00 

1875 

1,575,893,948 

69,292,009 

33,380,643 

2.12 

48.17 

1876 

1,561,880,545     ' 

63,860,713 

37,625,064 

2.41 

58.91 

1877 

1,455,387,854 

71,849,089 

34,337,350 

2.36 

47.65 

1878 

1,552,875,112 

78,986,070 

36,387,464 

2.34 

46.06 

1879 

1,598,461,986 

65,918,931 

37,294,197 

2.33 

56.57 

1880 

1,592.261,957 

67,015,831 

39,107,256 

2.45 

58.35 

Average  ad  valorem  duty  collected  in  the  eleven  years 


per  cent. 


Revenue  from  dutiable  sugars,  if  under  an  advalorem  tariff,  dur- 
ing the  eleven  fiscal  years,  ending  June  30, 1880,  would  have  been  as 
follows : 


Fiscal  years. 

Ad  valorem 

Ad  valorem 

Ad  valorem 

50  per  cent. 

45  per  cent. 

40  per  cent. 

1870 

$59,021,588 

$29,510,794 

$26,559,714 

$23,608,635 

1871 

58,382,938 

29,191,469 

26,272,322 

23,353,175 

1872 

73,318,299 

36,659,149 

32,993,234 

29,327,319 

1873 

74,993,073 

37,496,536 

33,746,882 

29,997,229 

1874 

76,080,510 

38,040,255 

34,236,229 

30,432,204 

1875 

69,292,009 

34,646,004 

31,181,404 

27,716,803 

1876 

63,860,713 

31,930,356 

28,737,320 

25,544,285 

1877 

71,849,089 

35,924,544 

32,332,090 

28,739,635 

1878 

78,986,070 

39,493,035 

35,543,731 

31,594,428 

1879 

65,918,931 

32,959,465 

29,663,518 

26,367,572 

1880 

67,015,831 

33,507,915 

\    30,157,123 

26,806,332 

The  above  tables  evidence  that  the  duty  on  imported  sugars,  col- 


20 

lected  under  the  present  tariff,  has  averaged  only  49.38  per  cent,  ad 
valorem  during  eleven  years,  although  the  sugar  tariff  was  de- 
signed in  1870  to  average  50  per  cent,  ad  valorem,  and  in  1875,  by 
the  25  per  cent,  addendum,  62.50  per  cent,  ad  valorem ;  the  differ- 
ence between  the  49.38  per  cent,  ad  valorem  duty  actually  received 
in  eleven  years,  and  56.9  per  cent.,  the  intended  average  under  the 
present  tariff*,  for  the  past  eleven  fiscal  years,  ending  June  30,  1880, 
represents  some  portion  of  the  loss  of  revenue  from  sugar  by  dis- 
coloration devices  for  evading  payment  of  proper  duty,  necessarily 
levied  by  the  Dutch  standard  only;  the  higher  and  more  honest 
classifications  of  sugar  for  duty  in  1880,  presented  elsewhere,  also 
evidence  the  necessity  of  providing  safeguards  for  the  present  tariff, 
or  of  adopting  an  actual  ad  valorem  tariff,  under  which,  with 
proper  checks  enforced,  discoloration  frauds  would  be  impossible, 
and  other  under-valuation  frauds  would  be  impracticable  and  un- 
profitable. 

Advocates  of  uniform  duty  on  all  sugars  not  above  No.  13,  1).  S. 
in  color,  and  advocates  of  a  uniform  duty  on  all  sugars  would  do 
well  to  inform  Congress  and  American  consumers  and  producers  of 
sugars  on  what  valid  or  tenable  grounds  they  alone  refuse  to  be  held 
in  check,  and  also  object  to  an  ad  valorem  sugar  tariff:  every  body 
having  the  slightest  knowledge  of  tariff  and  revenue  matters  know 
that  duty  levied  according  to  value  on  sugar  is  absolutely  equitable 
for  dry  and  semi-refined  but  discolored  centrifugal  sugars,  and 
all  other  grades  of  imported  sugars ;  therefore  the  alleged  but 
mythical  executive  abuses  of  which  uniform  and  specific  sugar-duty 
advocates  make  pretense  of  complaint,  could  not  by  any  possibility 
exist  under  an  ad  valorem  sugar  tariff,  nor  under  the  present  tariii 
enforced  by  the  use  of  proper  tests  in  aid  of  the  Dutch  standard. 

Attention  is  directed  to  the  important  fact,  clearly  exhibited  in 
the  above  tables,  that  under  the  present  tariff  the  total  duty  received 
from  sugar,  exclusive  of  melada,  during  eleven  years,  has  amounted 
to  $370,404,477,  or  49.38  per  cent,  ad  valorem  ;  whereas,  had  the 
duty  on  sugar  been  actual  ad  valorem,  at  50  per  cent.,  there  would 
have  been  collected  from  sugars,  exclusive  of  melada,  during  eleven 
years,  the  sum  of  $379,359,522,  an  excess  over  the  receipts  under 
the  present  tariff,  of  $8,955,055;  this  fact  furnishes  reliable  evidence 
that  less  than  50  per  cent,  ad  valorem  duty  on  sugars  will  produce 
the  present  revenue  from  sugar;  it  should  also  be  observed  above, 
that  the  annual  fluctuations  in  revenue  from  sugar  under  an  ad 
valorem  tariff,  would  be  less  than  under  the  present  or  any  other 
form  of  sugar  tariff;  therefore  objections  to  an  ad  valorem  sugar 
tariff  on  account  of  fluctuations  in  prices  <>!'  sugars,  air  utterly 
groundless. 

Revenue  to  be  derived  from  sugars  under  an  ad  valorem  tariff 
can  be  correctly  estimated;  because  if  foreign  Bugars  were  scarce, 
prices  would   rule  higher,  and  if  foreign  sugars  were  abundant  and 


21 

cheap  the  quantity  imported  would  be  largely  increased,  thus  pro- 
ducing a  reliable  basis  for  anticipating  approximately  the  amount 
of  duty  likely  to  be  received  from  sugar  and  melada  in  any  year;  a 
rapid  and  extraordinary  annual  increase  in  the  consumption  of 
sugars  would  be  inevitable  under  an  ad  valorem  tariff  of  40 
to50  per  cent,  on  all  sugar,  and  10  per  cent,  additional  on  all 
refined  sugar;  our  growing  and  vitally  important  beet,  cane 
and  sorghum  sugar  producing  industries,  our  sugar  refining 
and  outgrowing  industries,  and  the  interests  of  50,000,000  con- 
sumers of  sugar  in  this  country  would  be  effectually  benefited  and 
amply  protected  with  an  ad  valorem  tariff  on  all  sugars,  and  an 
additional  duty  of  ten  per  cent,  on  all  refined  sugars — which  is 
necessary  to  protect  Louisiana  sugars  and  refiners  against  bounty- 
fed  French  refined  sugars,  if  American  consumers  and  sugar  pro- 
ductive industries  are  to  be  benefited  permanently,  instead  of  being 
placed  at  the  mercy  of  the  French  government  when  it  has  de- 
stroyed our  sugar  producing  industries — cargoes  from  all  producing 
countries  would  be  more  numerous,  and  there  is  abundant  evidence 
that  with  such  auxiliary  tariff  aid,  our  commerce  with  remote  sugar 
producing  countries  would  increase  enormously. 

Retaining  the  present  sugar  tariff,  with  additional  legislative  pro- 
visions for  its  proper  enforcement,  by  the  use  of  analysis,  grinding, 
and  the  polariscope,  as  adjuncts  to  the  Dutch  standard,  for  correctly 
determining  classifications  for  duty,  involves  the  necessity  of  fixing 
polariscope  tests  for  each  classification  up  to  and  including  No.  18, 
Dutch  standard  sugars.  Thorough  enquiry  and  investigation  of 
cargo  samples,  ad  infinitum,  justifies  the  conclusion  that  the  polaris- 
cope test  on  all  imported  sugars  should  be  limited  as  follows : 

All  sugars  not  above  No.    7,  D.  S.  in  color,  not  above  82°. 

All  sugars  above  7  not  above  No.  10,  D.  S.  in  color,  not  above  87°. 
All  sugars  above  10  not  above  No.  13,  D.  S.  in  color,  not  above  92°. 
All  above  No.  13,  D.  S.  in  color,  above  92°,  to  pay  duty  accordingly. 

All  sugars  testing  higher  than  the  above  color  number  limit,  to  be 
classed  accordingly  and  made  to  pay  higher  and  proper  duty.  The 
omission  of  a  single  class,  especially  No.  10,  D.  S.,  would  be  a  blunder 
fatal  to  the  interests  of  American  consumers  and  producers  of  sugars. 

Should  the  present  sugar  tariff  and  Dutch  standard  be  retained, 
and  its  execution  be  properly  enforced  by  analysis,  grinding,  and 
the  polariscope  as  suggested  above,  provision  should  also  be  made 
that  raw  muscovado  "  grocers'  sugars,"  and  raw  beet  sugars,  when 
naturally  above  No.  13,  D.  S.  in  color,  and  testing  not  above  92°  in 
the  polariscope,  should  be  classed  for  duty  as  not  above  No.  13,  D. 
S.  in  color.  When  such  sugars  test  above  92°  they  should  be 
classed  according  to  color  and  quality.  Such  simple  provision 
would  prevent  the  possibility  of  tariff  discrimination  against  raw 
beet  and  grocers'  muscovado  sugars,  both  of  which  would  be  abso- 


22 

lutely  prohibited  under  a  uniform  tariff*  to  No.  13,  D.  S.,  or  a  specitic 
tariff od  all  sugars.  Under  an  actual  ad  valorem  tariff,  however. 
raw  grocers'  muscovado  sugars,  and  all  raw  beet  sugars,  like  all 
other  sugars,  would  equitably  pay  duty  on  their  actual  value  ;  in 
addition  to  which,  refined  sugars  should  pay  an  extra  ten  per  cent 
ad  valorem  duty,  for  the  protection  of  consumers  and  home  produc- 
tive industries. 

Facts,  common  sense  and  justice  prove  that  the  proper  solution 
of  the  sugar  tariff  question  is  the  adoption  by  Congress  of  the 
polariscope,  grinding  and  analysis  as  adjuncts  to  the  Dutch  standard, 
and  the  retention  of  the  present  tariff',  or  the  enactment  of  an  actual 
ad  valorem  tariff  on  imported  sugars,  with  10  per  cent,  extra  duty 
on  refined  sugars.  One  or  the  other  of  these  equitable  plans  affords 
the  only  means  by  which  the  various  grades  of  foreign  sugars  re- 
quired for  consumption  can  be  equitably  imported  upon  their  actual 
merits  as  to  quality  and  value,  and  sugars  cheapened  to  consumers: 
under  either  of  these  plans  low  grade  raw  sugars  for  refining,  and 
raw  sugars  suited  for  immediate  consumption,  known  as  grocers5 
sugars,  can  be  profitably  imported  in  competition  with  foreign 
centrifugal  sugars. 

Certainly  one  or  the  other  is  clearly  vital  to  the  sugar  productive 
industries  of  this  country,  which  cannot  successfully  compete  with 
foreign  centrifugal  sugars  made  for  this  market  expressly,  under 
any  uniform  or  specific  sugar  tariff;  the  interests  of  American  con- 
sumers, commerce,  sugar  producers,  traders  in  sugar,  and  of  the 
revenue,  will  be  best  served  by  the  retention  of  thepresent  tariff, 
protected  as  above  suggested,  or  by  the  adoption  by  Congress  o\'  an 
ad  valorem  tariff  on  sugar,  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  should 
be  authorized  in  either  event  to  employ  the  safeguards  above  sug- 
gested, and  such  other  means  as  he  may  deem  necessar}-  to  deter- 
mine actual  market  value,  and  prevent  undervaluations  and  false' 
classifications  of  imported  sugars  entered  for  duty. 

Henry  A.  Brown. 

,SV/./  onville.  Massachuseetts. 


THIS  BOOK  »WS»W*W 

DAY     AND    TO    *  ^^^^^^^ 

OVERDUE- 


M16552 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


j 


